W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Advice for comment

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 07:52:24 -0400
Message-ID: <4C935678.7090809@intertwingly.net>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: public-html-comments@w3.org
On 09/17/2010 04:20 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> I'd just like to draw attention to some posts by Shelley providing
> support for commenting on the specs:
> http://realtech.burningbird.net/reviewcomment-w3c-html5-specification
> http://realtech.burningbird.net/how-comment-and-when
> http://realtech.burningbird.net/reviewcomment-w3c-html5-specification/html5-document-structure
>
> I think these are really good and helpful, esp. for people new to the
> spec and the W3C. One thing I notice about the HTMLWG's home page:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/
> is that it's *not* particularly friendly to such an audience (it's a
> more typical working WG page; there's not even a list of links to
> tutorials, or to these wikipedia pages:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_(HTML5)
> something akin to the latter will be invaluable).
>
> Given the wide and diverse reviewers expected and desired for last call,
> I think it would be very good to have a more friendly entry point. I
> know there are other sources of friendliness, so I don't think it
> necessarily requires a huge chunk of work on the WG's part.

If you have suggestions about the web site, please open a bug on the 
"HTML WG website" using bugzilla: http://tinyurl.com/2ce2zyd

Overall, I would feel more comfortable linking to content such as this 
if were edited collaboratively, and therefore not weren't written in 
first person.  I would suggest using the W3C Wiki:

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/

> Cheers,
> Bijan.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 17 September 2010 11:52:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:05 GMT